Hi Arlo, you knew I wasn't getting at you, just answering the open question that you had asked.
This word "elitist" is something we need to work on ... fundamentally, are some people in a better position to make good decisions that affect other people (or not) ? As you say, whilst this is the subject of "talk-radio" style rhetoric and mockery, the chances of intelligent debate are pretty slim. But we'll get there. Ian On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 7:14 PM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [Ian] > I do not trust numbers (per se) I trust numbers (ie numbers, words, logic, > rhetoric too) provided by a "system" I trust. > > [Arlo] > Right. This is why I said "I trust the numbers because..." (1) they are > derived > from multiple inputs (and in this case predating Obama's remarks), (2) I find > no contradictory studies, (3) the numbers are confirmed by my experience and > (3) I can find no reasonable reason to "distrust" the numbers. I've been > waiting (as I always do) for Platt to provide ANY of these in rebuttal, but so > far its just the same moronic, pridefully ignorant talk-radio rhetoric. > > Consider the reverse. The oil companies tell us that we will save x (maybe > eventually) if we open up unfettered drilling on our protected lands (lands > you > and I own, by the way). I find more credible doubt to trust the oil companies > since they have a vested profit motive to "fudge" the numbers. And I can find > contradictory studies published that dispute the idea that "more drilling will > lower cost". So there is some dispute that must be addressed reasonably. > Finally, my personal experience has seen land devastated by industry, and so > before I sign off on a potential for even more of our wild, public, beautiful > lands to be ruined, I support all efforts at conservation first, and drilling > on in the dire end. > > Consider too that Platt's only remark was to "distrust the government" (he's > been unresponsive to my remarks that the figures come from, and are supported > by, the auto industry), a criticism I find on the whole fair (when did I say > "the government said it so I will blindly accept it in the face of contrary > evidence"), but why then should I so uncritically accept what the government > tells me about the war? Do you think Platt is advocating not trusting the > government when it tells us the surge is working? (He's been silent on that as > well) > > So yes, "trust the numbers because..." and articulate a reasonable proposition > why (which I have done, agreement with experience, lack of contrary evidence, > no reasonable motive for deceit that I can think of... I mean, if you told me > air-gauge industry paid for the study, maybe I'd have some cause for alarm). I > am open to reasonable disagreement, give me studies, logic, evidence, personal > experience, anything that would make me call this into question. Simply > squalking the moronic talking-points of talk-radio (elitism! arugula!) and > saying something is ridiculous over and over (the Mighty Wurlitzer) may make > the pridefully ignorant happy, but it hardly passes for any substantive > dialogue. > > By the way, did you know you can also improve your mileage 4-5% by putting in > new plugs (with platinum tips)? Several years back, the auto-industry also > published reports stating that most cars on the road would benefit from new > plugs. But I guess that's the arugula-eating elitist in me who points that > out. > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
